From ...
From: Erik Naggum
Subject: Re: setq x setf
Date: 2000/06/15
Message-ID: <3170098053699025@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 635097612
References: <0f106a56.4f744979@usw-ex0102-016.remarq.com> <3170059273480607@naggum.no>
mail-copies-to: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 961109734 17259 195.0.192.66 (15 Jun 2000 22:55:34 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; vox: +47 8800 8879; fax: +47 8800 8601; http://www.naggum.no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.6
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Jun 2000 22:55:34 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
* sashank@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Sashank Varma)
| since SETF is a macro, it has to expand into an expression.
| i assume that implementations ensure that this expansion is
| pure ANSI CL; this may even be mandated in the standard.
Why do you assume that? Why should it be mandated?
| one way that i could be wrong is that it could be perfectly legal
| for SETF to macroexpand into implementation-specific mechanisms for
| modifying bindings, but this just seems wrong.
Could you elaborate on why you think this way?
#:Erik
--
If this is not what you expected, please alter your expectations.